gontleman

After empowering my phone with the opera mini browser... They will never know! I rule.

Why did Jesus cross the road? He was nailed to the chicken.

Success of course. Dinner at the best mexican restaurant in town which I of course paid for... time spent in the park sitting, swinging, talking etc... then about 10 minutes spent afterwards before we left holding each other and a little kissing. And now I smell like her perfume. (A good smell)

Man this thread took off after I went to sleep. So yeah, so this entire day... well after lunch... was comprised of a lot of texting back and forth. This is all new territory for me.

And you're posting on DZ.com instead of continuing the evening the same way? Got a lot to learn. Well... I did learn that going down on a girl is great fun. Personally, I'd rather either spend all my time pleasing her and then finishing off when we're both done. I can get my self off anytime.

It was a bit of a hell freezes over thing for my friends. I owed it to them.

Having sex with your pets is considered animal abuse!! I'd like to think that maybe this is a tie-in with the post I made in walt's "post links to videos no one should ever see" thread. Am I right?

He's suddenly an expert on dick behavior. 2 decades of ownership... I think I've got the fundamentals down

And for the second time 32 seconds after that? Blues, Dave I was drunk, she was drunk... whiskey dick is bad like that.

2 hours later...

This is amazing. He was a bit of a poster boy for Christian entertainment. Now he's biting the hand that feeds. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he's getting in to.

My Dad always says 'God helps those who help themselves'. He's a Buddhist, mind, but I'd say it holds up. I've been audience to at least 3 sermons that specifically refute that notion. God helps those who ask for his help and have faith that he will provide. I don't know who made up that line, but I never bought it when I considered myself a believer, and I was never taught it.

I clearly made a blanket statement. My bad. But the core of that post was to show that Christians restrict themselves from certain things that non-Christians may not. (Since morality is individual, I obviously understand that Christians and non-Christians can share the same morals) It just so happen that some of those things are fun, some of them are sinful, some of them are hurtful (not just emotionally, think narcotics), and some/many of them are mixtures of all those things. Of course your later post gives examples. Thanks for clearing that up though.

Yeah, the MOST disturbing one fell in between that, and my original post here which was deleted ;-) Edit: I was actually quite upset while viewing the scene you refer to

Sick bastard!!!! Walt This is in no way related to my original post. Does not show any kind of sex. Almost though. Lets try again. http://postarchives.entensity.net/080604/media.php?media=irreversible.wmv

If the Christians are right, then the only thing of meaning in this life is your choice regarding salvation. If an atheist is right, then it stands that, given a true Christian's way of life, the Christian's deprived themselves of a significant portion of the human experience. Of course most people would find that things considered sinful are typically hurtful. So to tell a Christian "look at all these hurtful (yet sometimes fun) things you missed out on" is quite silly.

As I said, I was presenting my experiences as evidence for your faith or lack thereof. I presented it as my reason for faith. I'm not too concerned that you think my faith is subjective and arbitrary. That is how you see it. I'm not sure I can change that. Look how Jesus phrased it: Luke 16:31 "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' So if JC thinks some wouldn't be convinced if he was to rise from the dead and talk directly to them, I see little reason to believe i could convince them. However, I wish you well.

Careful with that free will stuff. None of us chose to be born. As such we are forced (circumstantially of course), according to the Christian doctrine, to choose A or B. The problem is, there is no logical proof for A. We are creatures of logic (insert Christian retaliatory remark about how humans could possibly comprehend the logic of God) and the only tools we have to make reasonable decisions are our 5 senses and our brain. So if we want to choose A we have to "deny ourselves". Well, that doesn't compute with many people. So if none of use chose to be here, we certainly didn't choose to be forced into some irrational decision about something we can only explain irrationally. Bleh. If it was true free will, we could just choose not to answer.

You can stick to the Bible if you prefer. While I was posting my original thoughts, I was going through it myself and read a few verses differently than I had before. Specifically verses that talk of being saved by faith in Christ. An angle I never heard anyone talk about (because it's not true, as i was taught, well if you take it to the extreme) is that it's Christ's faith in us that is our salvation. If he didn't have faith in us, then he wouldn't have been crucified. But he is the intercessor and he was the one asking for our forgiveness. In 13 years of church, I don't recall that really being focused on. So it goes.

Feel free to offer corrections. Don't just say "I SEE MISCONCEPTIONS" and not elaborate on what they are and why they are. I thought I was dealing with some pretty advanced concepts that I was taught in church. I'm not an outsider looking in. I'm a former insider.

It was in the news that over 90% of people have sex before they get married. If even only 50% of people in America are explicity taught abstinence only (read: Christians), what does that say about the effectiveness of abstinence only education? Kids are going to fuck, as he said. Best to give them the tools that make it more safe. It's the best thing you can do in lieu of raising kids that don't develop a sex drive until they're married.

I've had at least 5 friends work at one. They were all poker dealers. Made good money as well. The girls make more for less work. But anyone at the right casino with the right skills can bring down $36k per year. In Oklahoma, that's a very decent single's income. I wouldn't need anything more than that for sure.

Sashimi > Sushi IMO

That's pretty demented, but as far as Christianity goes, it's not correct. However, everything I was taught related to heaven is no less depressing. Heaven (and hell even) serve to negate nearly everything about your life on earth. Your experiences, emotions, thoughts, all of that and more, serve no purpose.*(don't worry Christians, I'll put the words in your mouth about this in a moment) All the pain, pleasure, sadness, and joy... everything here... is just a pretext, if not meaningless drivel, to something that is completely seperated in all ways from your life. Nothing that you go through in this life will prepare or make better your experience in the supposed afterlife, REGARDLESS of where the Christians, or any other religious sect for that matter, believe you will end up. Of course if you're a Christian, you believe that your only purpose should be that of the Christian god's. And essentially his purpose for you is accept salvation so that you can be with him and worship him for all eternity. (Gods sure do love that eternal worship) God doesn't want you to go to hell, but if you do not make the correctchoice (which you are coincidentally forced to make without being provided any evidence that can be observed outside of yourself that can logically [that is to say, without need for faith to fill in the gaps *(stand by for more on this)] lead any human being to end up with an undeniable, factual, and rational assumption that he does exist) then you are eternally damned for this ultimately (in at least 2 senses of the word) consequential mistake brought forth from your, ironically, inconsequential life. And as far as my comment about faith goes... the necessity of faith according to the Christian doctrine validates the beliefs of those who follow it, and simultaneously provides one of the strongest flavors of ammunition for those who seek to argue against it. To accept the free gift of salvation requires you to have faith in these core beliefs (emphasis on the 2nd one ): - Faith that the Christian god exists - Faith that Jesus' death forgives the sins of those to have said faith or belief - Faith that the Bible, in it's expression of the requirements for salvation, is not fallible. The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word "faith" as follows: 1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. 3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters. 4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will. Those are all pretty spot on definitions that I feel the Christians among us will find acceptable. But lets focus on definition number two. Faith is belief that does not depend on logical proof or material evidence. What this means, in other words, is that Christian's do not need logical or material (that is to say pertaining to the physical rather than the spiritual or intellectual aspect of things) evidence to believe what they do. In fact, if such proof or evidence existed (that is to say that it was observable and comprehensible by all human beings) it would entirely negate the need for faith at all. It is important that such proof or evidence validates ALL of the core beliefs (mentioned above) that the Christian doctrine holds. As such, if said proof/evidence existed, one's belief in God wouldn't be based on a love for God (this is important) but instead the proof or evidence. And God requires that you do more than just acknowledge he exists, but you are called to cleave to him, love him, seek to please him with your mind, heart, and soul. And that's biblical folks. What I argue is that God does not provide proof for his existence because by doing so, to believe requires faith, and faith is proof/evidence of love for God. And that is what God wants from you instead of just believing. If you love God you will seek to please him and he will be pleased. As such, I believe that logically, proof for God does not exist. This logical statement validates my above statement that we, as humans, are not given proof to base our choice of whether to believe or not. We are required to make decision based on what boils down to heresay between OTHER humans. Hell, the bible was written by humans if not merely penned. So given that we, as humans, are logical (that is to say capable of reasoning based on what we observe) creatures who can't even make the right decisions about things which are easily proven and observable, why in the blue fuck should we be held accountable for consequences of such an absurd decision? In short , I do not believe in God, because to do so, would require me to believe in a being which is supposedly infinite in power, mercy, grace, and understanding, yet is not capable of forgiving the simplest sin of a human (which is a logical being that can only rationally make decisions about things which are observable to all of humanity by their 5 senses) created in such a way, and placed in such an evironment, that it is impossible to make the a rational decision to believe in something which, evidently, does not exist. The infinite God fails to save the eternal spirit of a fallible human who made the wrong decision when they were not presented all the evidence their nature deemed necessary to logically affirm one way or the other. It's all bullshit.

I can't even think of how you could give them the birth control and discuss it without essentially supporting the decision. Because inevitably what it brings across, more often than not, is: "I don't want you to have sex, but I suppose/know you're likely to engage in sexual activity. So take this for when/if the situation arises." It's like giving them to keys to the car and telling them not to drive while you're away on vacation. I think the better choice of words is that you're "enabling" the child to feel more secure in their decision to be sexually active. I guess that counts as "supporting" it.